Wow, very interesting. If these facts by Boeing are in fact true. I think Airbus will have to dish out so massive discounts for airlines to buy the A350. Can these numbers be true though? Is the 787 that good?
Dan

"The second factor is, maybe they (Airbus) realized the first offer was not good enough, or they just basically confirmed the value of the 787," he said with a smile."

I don't accept Boeing's (or Airbus's) figures at face value but I find it interesting that Airbus felt the need to offer a "unique" discount in this competition. If they need to do this on a regular basis, a lot of the A350's perceived profit potential (and credibility) will vanish. Bad enough they've talked about doing this with the A340 series but if they must with an airplane they tout in ads as "the world's most advanced twin-engine aircraft" , then the A350 could end up being less of a cash-cow than they've hoped. I'm surprised after the Airbus furor over Boeing's 747-8I vs. A380 figures that Toulouse isn't putting up more of a fuss over these claims, except, perhaps that they may now realize it makes them look rather like a child having a tantrum.

I, being an avid Boeing fan, have always hoped that the 787 would blow the A350 out of the water... but 3.5 mil a year?
I raise an eyebrow.
I mean, really. Granted, Airbus builds a plane that burns... what did they say, 9% more fuel than the Boeing copmetitor? Talking about the 346 vs. 773ER... you know, where Leahy came out and started offering cash rebates a few weeks back... (wow, and I thought Chevy was desperate)

But seriously, that aside, would they even bother to build a plane that costs 3.5 million more to operate per year?

The question in my mind is something like... is "all else equal"? Those figure only mean something if all else is equal... HOW did Boeing juggle the numbers to be able to make that statement?

And, given Boeing's track record (Every single product they've come out with lately burns less fuel than promised... all five versions of the 777, the 764, the 737NG, etc.) then maybe it's even better than they promise???

Quoting AA737-823 (Reply 7):Granted, Airbus builds a plane that burns... what did they say, 9% more fuel than the Boeing copmetitor? Talking about the 346 vs. 773ER

Air France, another major Airbus customer but also a big 777 buyer, is one of few carriers that has flown both A340s and 777s on the same routes. Chief Financial Officer Philippe Calavia said a first-generation A340-300 from the 1990s burns about 15% to 20% more fuel per seat than a 777 of the same vintage. "It's more costly to maintain four engines than two," he said, adding that Air France expects "to further increase the proportion of 777s in our fleet." (WSJ 1/16/206)

Is it my imagination or are these puff-pieces coming out almost weekly now?

It's a long way to go before either the 787 or A350 go into service and just personally, I am more interested in Boeings ability to get the 787 technology exactly as promised and deliver according to schedule. Up until then it's smoke and mirrors.

Quoting AvObserver (Reply 6):I'm surprised after the Airbus furor over Boeing's 747-8I vs. A380 figures that Toulouse isn't putting up more of a fuss over these claims, except, perhaps that they may now realize it makes them look rather like a child having a tantrum.

As for the childish tantrum bit - sheesh. Airbus is a COMPANY. I know people here are fond of making it 'personal', but it gets a bit lame after a while...

I think the reason that Airbus isn't having a tantrum is there is always the possibility is that these claims are in the same bit-bucket as Boeings bogus A380 vs 748 claims.

My take on this is that right now Boeing perceive a commercial threat in the long-range market (where they are traditionally the strongest and obtain the biggest margins) from the A380 and the new variants of the A340. Don't laugh, it'll be interesting if Airbus 'get it right' with the 340-600+. There is also the fact that the A350 is morphing from the much criticised (at least on a.net) pimped up A330 to something a little more interesting.

I think that if Airbus make some ground to reverse the apparent deal-losses of last year and given the expected slowdown in civil a/c orders which is expected in 06/07, Boeing could well have some problems if the 748 fizzes (and it's not exactly setting the world on fire right now...) in terms of losing market share to Airbus in the long-range/VLA market.

They have to keep the pressure on, however they do it and I think there are going to be some carriers who will want to wait and see if the 787 can be produced and delivered according to schedule and indeed if the aircraft can be certified and operated safely given the new technologies inherent in the design.

Quoting Keesje (Reply 8):The media speculated on a $100 million discount on a 3 billion deal were 10-20% discounts are normal,

How do you know it's not $100 million on top of the normal discount?

Quoting Hb88 (Reply 10):I think there are going to be some carriers who will want to wait and see if the 787 can be produced and delivered according to schedule and indeed if the aircraft can be certified and operated safely given the new technologies inherent in the design.

The same can be said of the A380, except that we already know it's behind schedule.

I think all PR has to be taken with a grain of salt, and if it is indeed 3.5 million a year per aircraft... who in their right mind will order the Airbus? Airbus will seriously need to give the plane away for anyone to take it if those numbers are true. Does anybody actually believe that to be the case?

Some airlines are dumb and make mistakes in their fleet planning, but this is beyond ridiculous...

Quoting MarshalN (Reply 12):I think all PR has to be taken with a grain of salt, and if it is indeed 3.5 million a year per aircraft... who in their right mind will order the Airbus? Airbus will seriously need to give the plane away for anyone to take it if those numbers are true. Does anybody actually believe that to be the case?

I think this all depends on the configuration that the 787 and A350 are being offered in. If Boeing is selling a 9 abreast 788 with OEW at least 10% less than the A358 in abreast despite similar capacity, then combined with the much lower list price of the 788 in relation to the A358, the operating and acquisition costs would be substantially lower. If Airbus can get a 9 abreast format acceptable to airlines in the A350 by 2011, then maybe Boeing's claims are off base. But even if they do make 9 abreast acceptable, airlines would have to fill even more seats on the A358.

Quoting BoomBoom (Reply 11):Quoting Hb88 (Reply 10):
I think there are going to be some carriers who will want to wait and see if the 787 can be produced and delivered according to schedule and indeed if the aircraft can be certified and operated safely given the new technologies inherent in the design.

The same can be said of the A380, except that we already know it's behind schedule.

True enough, but in my view, there are certain technologies specific to all-CFRP aircraft (as opposed to the A380) which really need to be completely ironed out before the 787 becomes a safe and reliable aircraft to operate. I'm thinking mainly of things like vulnerability to ramp-rash or airframe static dissipation in high EM environments.

In any case, although it's an extremely unfashionable thing to say on a.net, I don't think the 6 mo delay in the EIS for the A380 will matter much in the long run no matter what the anti-A380 camp might wish for.

cheers

[...although for the life of me I don't really get the whole spittle-flecked vitriolic hysteria you routinely see on a.net in relation to the 380 and/or Airbus. Anyone reading posts here would think the Airbus EC personally went around and kicked a.netters dogs.]

I agree with Atmx2000... a great deal of cost effectiveness is placed on the layout of the plane, so there's no need to jump to start conclusions immediately.

There is not one piece of data that cannot be distorted into something to make a company look good. As much as Boeing has been delivering in the past, they clearly need to continue exceeding those expectations with the 787 and 747-8I especially -- because there exists a viable product in a very, very hot market. Simply "holding on," as they have done with the 737NG, won't be enough for this size-class...

Did you see the video where they took a hammer and a chisel and pounded away at a composite piece on the 787? They didn't even dent it, it was pretty impressive, though some other issues probably still remain like the static dissipation.

Quoting MarshalN (Reply 12):I think all PR has to be taken with a grain of salt...

A grain? More like a bucket in this case, methinks.

Quoting MarshalN (Reply 12): ... and if it is indeed 3.5 million a year per aircraft... who in their right mind will order the Airbus?

On the basis of the Boeing 787/A350 comparison, I don't think any airline would ever be stupid enough to order the A350. I guess those dumb folks at Airbus will just have to wait forever to get their first A350 order.

Also, do not forget the credibility issues that Airbus has put itself under as of late. They seem to over promise for the sales, and lack when time comes to deliver. This has been consistent with the existing aircraft, and takes them a few iterations before geting it right. on the other hand, Boeing has been very conservative in their promises, and in service numbers have been better than promised. So naturally, the airlines take this into consideration mainly when a new model comes out.

No Boeing has to deliver on their promises with 787, which I think they will given their conservative nature and design philosophy.

We have to wait and see in 2007/2008 after aircraft do into commercial service (real life scenario not the conceptual numbers).

We all must be carefull of this lobbying , coming from Chicago.
It's really more realistic to wait both these planes will fly , and can be able to compare their fuel consumption in real , not in words before they fly.

So many comments that we have to wait until both aircraft are flying to be able to make any relevant comparisions, and that all information from either side is simply unreliable sales-speak hooey.

And yet many airlines have already been able to make their own decisions and have placed orders worth over US$500billion worth of planes, spelled out in contractual agreements including performance requirements, from both manufacturers.

Seems to me that if you are in the right position today you can get plenty of quality information of future aircraft performance.